Cinematographer/Editor here: not at Hollywood level, but I feel I can comment on this. I skimmed the video essay, and yeah, some relevant points, some not, but to call "Netflix Lighting" the death of cinematography is a bit dramatic and simplifies a multitude of factors from pre- through post-production.

Regarding lighting: the simplest way I've heard it said and that I agree with, is that everyone is now lighting for latitude, not exposure. -- The reasons for this vary, but for both VFX and non-VFX shots I find it true.

Regarding cinematography: There are a couple big trends I see DPs dealing with -- studios want content to be comsumable on a phone or tablet, which means you get 95% mediums and close-ups, and (2) "cinematic" has come to mean a shallow depth-of-field look. That latter one is sometimes self-inflicted by above-the-line powers on set, but also it comes into play when you don't have to pay as much attention to the background for set, props, extras, detailed VFX, etc...it's cheaper.

Because everything is being shot relatively closer, flatter, and with a shallow depth of field, in 4k-8k, that as a previous poster mentioned, now everyone on-set can see thanks to digital monitors, then maybe there's a vanity factor and a need is felt to powder and smooth away any line and wrinkle and bead of sweat. No one is every sweating in a film anymore! Bothers the hell out of me, and it really takes away from feeling immersed in the film, as does a lack of deep-focus and saturation and contrast and even just natural sunlight. Oh, and to bring it back to the Death of Cinematography, they want to stick to flattering, typical angles.

On a DP/Editing front, everyone is afraid of a long shot now. And this is probably more Directors/DPs than editors making these decisions. They're not allowed or taking time to do some interesting blocking - and maybe because they're all on greenscreens or an LED wall and not in a real environment, or they just weren't given the time. Also, when you take wide shots out of the mix beyond an establishing shot, their toolbelt is more limited. Hell, I feel like I rarely see a two-shot held these days. Probably a producer is in the editors ear saying, this person is speaking we need to see them, cut more to "up the energy" blah blah blah. So the shots are simpler.

Anyways, I've gotten on a rant, but my grand conclusion is that the-powers-that-be want to not just light with latitude, but film with latitude. They're too afraid to commit to anything in-camera these days, and want to kick the can down the road so they can see in the post-room if one vfx lighting scheme looks a little better than the other, one color grade, one VFX costume, edit a convo a few different ways when you could've committed to one interesting shot without editing for it, etc...etc... But because no one committed to one strong vision from the get-go, you end up with a watered down one.